HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE MANOJ KUMAR TI WARI Writ Petition Service Single No. 444 of 2026

18^TH February, 2026 Shri Shekhar and another. --Petitioners Versus Uttarakhand Public Service Commission --Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Gaurav Kandpal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the Respondent.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGMENT

Petitioners participated in a selection for the post of Additional Private Secretary, held by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. Since their name did not figure in the list of successful candidates, therefore, they have approached this Court, seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the result of the Shorthand Examination dated 03.02.2026, in so far as it pertains to the petitioners, being arbitrary &

illegal.(Annexure No 9)

(ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Commission to re-evaluate/re-check the shorthand examination answer sheets of the petitioners in accordance with the prescribed guidelines and to declare the revised result thereof (iii) issue writ, order or direction directing the respondent Commission to forthwith provide the petitioners with copies of their shorthand examination answer sheets/typed transcripts along with the detailed evaluation sheet.”

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Public Service Commission was asked to get instructions. Today, on instructions, Mr. Pankaj Miglani submits that every candidate for the post of Additional Private Secretary was required to qualify shorthand examination, which included type test, however, petitioners could not qualify in the said test, therefore, their name was not considered for further round of selection.

3. Regarding the relief claimed in prayer no. 2, learned counsel for the Commission submits that in view of provision contained in Rule 31 sub-rule (7) of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (Procedure and Conduct of Business) Rules, 2013, the prayer for revaluation or re-scrutiny of answer books cannot be granted. The said provision is extracted below:-

“31(7). There shall be no provision for revaluation or re-scrutiny of the Answer Books of the Examination conducted by the Commission.”

4. As regards prayer no. 3, learned counsel appearing for the Commission refers to provision contained in Rule 71 sub-rule (7). He submits that since the selection process is still on and mains examinations are going to be held shortly, therefore, disclosure of marks or supply of answer scripts of shorthand examination would compromise the confidentially of the selection process and would lead to further complications. Rule 71(7) of the aforesaid Rules is reproduced below for ready reference:-

“71(7). After the selection process of an examination is over, if a candidate(s) under the RTI Act-2005 demands Photostat copy/copies of his/her Answer Books/OMR Answer Sheets or wants to see them, the procedure formed by the Commission for this purpose will be followed.”

5. From perusal of the aforesaid Rules, it is revealed that Rule 45 thereof contains a provision that marks of all candidates shall be displayed on the website of the Public Service Commission, after final results are declared.

6. Petitioners have not challenged the relevant provisions of the applicable Rules. In view of the aforesaid provisions, contained in the Rules and also in view of the judgment rendered by this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1555 of 2025, the reliefs as claimed in prayer nos. 2 & 3 cannot be granted. The first prayer made by the petitioners is to quash the result of the shorthand examination, however, no valid ground has been raised for seeking such relief. Merely because a candidate is declared unsuccessful in an examination, cannot be a reason for setting aside the selection.

7. Thus, there is no